- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
- within Intellectual Property and Energy and Natural Resources topic(s)
Court holds that retirement letters compromised a company’s counterclaims for breach of warranty, despite containing no express waiver of claim
The High Court has held that retirement letters entered into between a company and its departing shareholder-directors compromised the company's counterclaims for breach of warranty against those individuals, even though the letters contained no express language to that effect.
What happened?
Evans v JNP Group Consulting Engineers Ltd [2026] EWHC 2175 (Comm) concerned a dispute arising after a restructuring in 2016, in which the businesses of two separate LLPs were transferred to a company under business sale agreements. The claimants were members of one LLP and, as a result of the transaction, became shareholders and directors of the company.
In 2018, each of the claimants retired from the company and signed a retirement letter addressing the financial arrangements relating to their exit. These retirement letters set out the total amounts payable by the company to each of the claimants in respect of their directors’ loan account, salary, pension and shares.
The claimants subsequently sought further sums in connection with their exit. The company counterclaimed for breaches of warranties given by the claimants under one of the business sale agreements.
The High Court held that the company's counterclaim had been compromised by the letters and dismissed it, even though the letters did not contain any express release, an entire agreement clause or a conventional “full and final settlement” provision.
The court held that - taking into consideration the language used in the letters, the circumstances surrounding their signing, and commercial common sense - the letters created a full and final settlement of all claims between the parties (in both directions).
The judge noted that the company had drafted the retirement letters after discussion with the claimants, and each letter dealt with both the payments to be made to each claimant after their departure and the timing of those payments.
The letters provided for deductions from the claimants’ directors’ loan accounts for unrecovered aged debts. This was the same subject matter as the company’s claim for breach of warranty. The company had been aware of the circumstances at the time, but it did not mention the warranty claim in the letters. The letters did not provide that sums payable to the claimants by the company were subject to any claims the company might have against the claimants.
The judge commented that “… for each of the Claimants to agree to retire on the basis of specific payments being made over a specified period while still being potentially liable to make substantial payments to the Company, and for the Company to agree to make those payments while intending to retain the right to bring claims for substantial sums in respect of bad debts of which it was already aware, does not make commercial sense”.
What does this mean for me?
The case is a useful reminder to clearly carve out or expressly provide for any known claims in exit documents entered into with a director or shareholder on their departure from a company or business.
In light of this decision, it is wise to assume that a document setting out exit terms for an individual who is leaving a company may be treated as drawing a line under that individual’s involvement with the company in any capacity, even if it does not expressly say so.
If either party wishes to preserve particular rights or claims against the other after the exit document is signed, this should be clearly provided for in the document.
Macfarlanes is a pre-eminent law firm advising a global client base across Private Capital, Private Wealth, M&A and Disputes.
Visit our website to learn more about our services and how we can assist.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
